Spider-Man 3 [UMD for PSP] Reviews

• Too many crooks spoil the broth

  
  By A3KJ6JAZPH382D on 2007-05-09
  "Spiderman 3" falls victim to a common ailment of most hero movie franchises. If one villain is good, then two would be great, But if two would be great, then three would be fabulous! (Think the horribly overstuffed "Batman & Robin" or "Superman III.") So while I really enjoyed the third installment in the Spiderman series, I kept getting the feeling that I was watching what would have made two great movies crammed into a single average one.
  
  For instance, is Thomas Haden Church's Sandman necessary to this film? Granted he lets the dark Spiderman loose for a bit, but both The New Goblin and Venom get their turns as bad spidey bait. It also sucked points away by convoluting plot points and weakly re-writing the circumstances of Uncle Ben's death. The movie's pace would have significantly improved had the conflicts been more limited to Peter, Harry and Eddie Brock. Since the main focus was on Harry and Peter's attention to Mary Jane and Eddie's anger at losing his girl to Peter, it would have tightened the story if Sandman had been saved for later.
  
  The conflict also gives Tobey Maguire a chance to goof around with the role. His moments as Dark Peter Parker are some of the film's funniest (following J.K. Simmons as J. Johah Jameson), and his antics in the jazz-cafe were the ones that got the big reaction in the theater I was watching this. I also found it amusing that when Peter gets bad his bangs suddenly fall down his face and he looks like he should be joining a Fall Out Boy/My Chemical Romance concert.
  
  What all this crowding does accomplish is a shortchanging of character development. How Sandman and Venom form an alliance in zero seconds flat is whiplash inducing as is the almost total lack of development in Topher Grace's character. He's brought in so quickly you wonder how he became so angry so fast in his evolution into Venom. Aunt May is barely in the plot at all; Peter's apartment manager and daughter get more significance. Harry/The New Goblin plays a major role throughout, but his character stages are done so abruptly that, once again, you end up wondering what the heck just happened here.
  
  This probably won't distract you from all the action, and Sam Raimi again delivers the goods. The flights, fights and special effects are astonishing as ever. Spiderman's suits are as sleek and cool as before, and all the gimmicks will keep your eyes on the screen. So will the obligatory Stan Lee cameo. All told, "Spiderman 3" is not a bad movie, but given that both one and two were amazing, it is still a minor let-down.
  
  

• Lower Your Expectations A Bit and Then Have a Blast!

  
  By AZCDCO6KK2T81 on 2007-05-07
  This film had awfully big shoes to fill with the highly successful Spider-Man 2 which is arguably the best comic-book film of all time. One can't fault the spidey team for trying to be ambitious here, but they just can't exceed, let alone match, their previous effort. This film is extremely satsifying and deserves to be the blockbuster that it is with its record setting $148 million opening weekend, outdoing Pirates 2 the previous opening weekend champ. Pirates 3 just missed outperforming Spidey 3 by about 10 million recently; therefore, Spidey 3 reigns champ for now on opening box-office revenue.
  
  One has to consider the pressure on this team to continue a story in which they obviously have great affection and in addition to living up to great expectations, these folks also had to heavily consider that this could be the last Spider-Man film as both Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst have made it very clear that they want to move on past Spider-Man before it wrecks their careers like the superhero actors of the past. This may explain the overly complex storyline, the introduction of Gwen Stacey (for future romance should Dunst walk), multiple villains (under the notion that more is always better), and the over-reliance on special effects (which are outstanding). It's all a bit too much even though it is all entertaining, but if this is to be the last Spidey film, they wanted to give it all they had. Too bad it just isn't as good as their last effort, but it is still an outstanding film and great popcorn fun. You will have a blast with this film if you lower your expectations just a bit. I left the theater very satisfied.
  
  Some Strengths: The Sandman effects are outstanding and manage to emote great sympathy for this character who is skillfully played by Thomas Haden Church of TV's Wings and the hit film Sideways. The black blob effects are really spooky. Kudos to James (Annapolis) Franco as Parker's best friend. He was outstanding and believable the entire time.
  
  Some Weaknesses: Too ambitious and too contrived. Spidey being taken over by the black blob wanders back and forth from weird and haunting to sensationally funny to the point of looking like a Saturday Night Live parody of Saturday Night Fever. It became laughably distracting to an otherwise good storyline.
  
  

• Spider-Man 3 takes you on an emotional journey and does not disappoint

  
  By AIRHRV3D8X4J1 on 2007-05-05
  I have to say Spider-Man 3 was another great addition to the Spider-Man trilogy. I do have to admit I was afraid this movie would not live up to the first two Spider-Man's. I mean those first two were great and how could this one possibly match that? After I finished watching it I can say I was not at all disappointed. I think many people were expecting this to be just like Spider-Man 1 and 2. Spider-Man 3 does take more risks than its predecessors by having more villains than usual, but It still manages to entertain, spark emotion and above all inspire and bring out the kid in many of us. It is like the first two with many of the same characters returning, but where Spider-Man 3 differs is when we get to see the dark side (with the black suit) of Spider-Man which takes the movie to a whole new level. I have to say this movie was AWESOME. This movie truly has a great stand out cast. TOBEY MAGUIRE who plays Spider-Man did a great job as usual and brought emotion to the character that made him more human than any other hero in a comic book inspired movie. The action scenes are amazing and they make you jump out of your seat a few times. All that along with the emotional journey that Spider-Man takes you on, that's what truly makes this movie so great and special. This is one Roller-Coaster ride that I highly encourage any one to see. The ending is also a surprise and I will not give it away, but I will say some people liked it and some people did not, Go figure. I did not buy in to all the hype of this movie, or the negative things some critics had to say. I went to see Spider-Man 3 to be entertained and I was not at all disappointed. With a expected DVD and blu-ray release date of November 2007 this is sure to be one great year for Spider-Man fans!
  
  

• Too many villains make for a scattered plot

  
  By A33CLVW2K7SL1P on 2007-05-21
  Spider-Man 3 is everything that its predecessors were not. In other words, where the previous two were shining examples of great movies made from comic books - especially the second - this was not. In the event that anyone ever wonders again if more villains means a better movie, SM 3 should provide the definitive answer: NO. The problem with making a movie with three villain is that you can't ever properly focus on one of them, which then means that unless they're united as one with a common purpose (as in Superman 2), you're left with plot strands and story arcs that intersect and some are left hanging while others are explored. You *forget* that there's something else happening - or, if you don't forget, you wonder why you should care.
  
  The special effects, it should go without saying, were fantastic, and the high production standards and solid acting were what lifted this from being a very, very bad movie to an entertaining one. In the hands of a lesser director, and certainly without the big budget, this might have been the cinematic equivalent of used coffee grounds.
  
  But even so, there were times when I laughed aloud in the wrong places. For example, Spidey encounters his dark side in this film, and much has been made of that in the previews, so much that I don't feel the need to say much more about it. When Peter first saw his dark side, we got a glimpse of that with Maguire pulling his hair down in front of his face in a pseudo goth style (had it been longer). He didn't look like he was in a moment of magnifying his dark side; rather, he looked silly. The film's exploration of Spider-Man's and Parker's dark side delved no deeper than the black suit he wore for a bit. And it was, well, lame. My roommate thought that the film was trying to be funny during most of it, and they probably were. In that case, it truly beggars the imagination. I hope they were trying to be serious, because if anything Maguire was doing while wearing the black suit under dark clothes and messy hair was supposed to be taken seriously, ouch. It didn't work.
  
  Another friend commented that he wanted to channel Tom Hanks from A League of Their Own and remind the filmmakers that "There's no crying in comic books!" Of course, there is, but there was far too much of it in this movie, with little believability to back it up. There was far too much down time - i.e., time where nothing of consequence is happening - for a film with a budget of some $258 million dollars.
  
  Still, I found myself entertained. True, I was quite pleased when the film ended, but I wasn't pulling an Elaine from Seinfeld when she was watching The English Patient with Peterman, squirming in my seat and wanting to get out at any cost. That was likely due to, as I mentioned above, the high production standards.
  
  
  

• Bite Fever

  
  By A37PV5GMP2ILJC on 2007-05-15
  (To the tune of Staying Alive)
  
  Well, you can tell by the way the records broke
  That the whole world loves that Spidey bloke
  Movie three and it's still hot
  It's taken over the number one spot
  And it's all right - It's okay
  though not the best by a long way
  Kind of hard to understand
  Why so many villains had been planned
  
  Whether you're a spider or riding on a glider
  try stayin' alive, stayin' alive
  See the Sandman quaking and Venom expurgating
  to try to revive, keep the series alive.
  Ha, ha, ha, ha, stayin' alive, stayin' alive.
  Ha, ha, ha, ha, keep it alive
  
  Well the movie's packed with CGI
  And Parker's life's now on a giddy high
  Got a diamond ring for Mary Jane
  And Harry O's his friend again
  It all looks all right, A-Okay
  Saved Gwen Stacey's life today
  Then there came a change of plan
  When he got blasted by Sandman
  
  Repeat chorus
  
  Life goin' nowhere. Somebody help me.
  Somebody help me, yeah.
  Life goin' nowhere. Somebody help me.
  Somebody help me, yeah. Stayin' alive.
  
  Well, you can tell by the way he does that walk
  he's no ladies' man, he's still a dork
  Changed his hairstyle and his pants
  but clean forgot to learn to dance
  But now it's all right - It's okay
  Try to look the other way
  You must try to understand
  How symbiotes affect a man.
  
  Repeat chorus
  
  (Extra verses - long, long movie)
  
  Well the Bugle's hired another guy
  But something about him doesn't fly
  Had a falling out with Mary Jane
  And now Harry's gone all green again
  Now it's not all right, no - no way
  The black suit steals his heart away
  Hate to leave it in the lurch
  But it's time to dump it in the church
  
  Repeat chorus
  
  Well you can tell that the bad guys think they've won
  And poor Spidey's feeling put upon
  Using Mary Jane as spider bait
  They settle down to watch and wait
  And it's a good fight, where you'll see
  Who's a friend or enemy
  How it ends I'll never tell
  But there's a bell tolling in hell
  
  Repeat chorus for the last time
  
  Life goin' somewhere. Somebody helped me.
  Somebody helped me, yeah.
  Life goin' somewhere. Somebody helped me, yeah.
  I'm stayin' alive.
  
  
  
  Amanda Richards, May 15, 2007
  
  
  
• Spider-Man 3 spins its way to blu-ray October 30, 2007!!!
  By AIRHRV3D8X4J1 on 2007-08-07
  I have to say Spider-Man 3 was another great addition to the Spider-Man trilogy. I do have to admit I was afraid this movie would not live up to the first two Spider-Man's. I mean those first two were great and how could this one possibly match that? After I finished watching it I can say I was not at all disappointed. I think many people were expecting this to be just like Spider-Man 1 and 2. Spider-Man 3 does take more risks than its predecessors by having more villains than usual, but It still manages to entertain, spark emotion and above all inspire and bring out the kid in many of us. It is like the first two with many of the same characters returning, but where Spider-Man 3 differs is when we get to see the dark side (with the black suit) of Spider-Man which takes the movie to a whole new level. I have to say this movie was AWESOME. This movie truly has a great stand out cast. TOBEY MAGUIRE who plays Spider-Man did a great job as usual and brought emotion to the character that made him more human than any other hero in a comic book inspired movie. The action scenes are amazing and they make you jump out of your seat a few times. All that along with the emotional journey that Spider-Man takes you on, that's what truly makes this movie so great and special. This is one Roller-Coaster ride that I highly encourage any one to see. The ending is also a surprise and I will not give it away, but I will say some people liked it and some people did not, Go figure. I did not buy in to all the hype of this movie, or the negative things some critics had to say. I went to see Spider-Man 3 to be entertained and I was not at all disappointed.
  
  Spider-Man 3 Two-Disc Special Edition DVD, Two-Disc Blu-ray
  
  DISC ONE Special Features:
  
  * Digitally Mastered Audio and Video
  * Audio: English Dolby True HD 5.1, English PCM 5.1 (Uncompressed), French, Spanish, Portuguese, Thai 5.1 (Dolby Digital)
  * Subtitles: English, English SDH, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Korean, Thai, Chinese Mandarin, Chinese Cantonese
  * Bloopers
  * Photo Galleries
  * Snow Patrol Music Video
  * Audio Commentary with Director Sam Raimi and Cast Members Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, James Franco, Thomas Haden Church, Topher Grace, and Bryce Dallas Howard
  * Audio Commentary with Producers Laura Ziskin, Avi Arad and Grant Curtis, Editor Bob Murawski and Special Effects Supervisor Scott Stokdyk
  * Closed Captioned
  * Bonus Previews
  
  
  DISC TWO Special Features:
  
  * Digitally Mastered Audio and Video
  * Audio: English, Spanish 5.1 (Dolby Digital). English, Spanish (Dolby Surround)
  * Subtitles: English, Spanish
  * Featurette: Grains of Sand - Building Sandman
  * Featurette: Re-Imagining the Goblin
  * Featurette: Covered in Black - Creating Venom
  * Featurette: Hanging On...Gwen Stacy and the Collapsing Floor
  * Featurette: Fighting, Flying & Driving - The Stunts
  * Featurette: Tangled Web: The Love Triangles of Spider-Man 3
  * Featurette: Wall Of Water
  * Featurette: On Location Cleveland - The Chase on Euclid Avenue
  * Featurette: On Location New York -From Rooftops to Backstreets
  * Featurette: The Science of Sound
  * Featurette: Inside The Editing Room
  * Theatrical TV Spots From Around the World
  * Closed Captioned
  
  Spiderman 1-2-3
  
  
  
• Spider-Man III
  By A1TMAVN4CEM8U8 on 2007-12-30
  Spider-Man III DVD
  
  This time around Spider-Man battles with three villains, the Sandman, Venom, and the New Goblin
  
  Recommended for Spider-man fans and fans of cartoon based movies.
  
  Gunner December, 2007
  
  
  
• Looks like Tobey Maguire and Sam Raimi were actually trying to make a bad movie
  By A8LFXWE1VZ94A on 2007-05-04
  Right now, I know you're not going to want to believe me. But trust me, this movie isn't what you think it is. I loved the first Spider-Man movie. I tell people that it took me on the whole emotional journey: I laughed, I cried, and I had more fun that I did during any other super hero movie. And then I enjoyed the second Spider-Man movie.
  
  But there were those rumors that Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire, and Kirsten Dunst all wanted out of the franchise. And there were those rumors that the producers wanted to do more, with or without them. About halfway through "Spider-Man 3", I got the distinct impression that writer/director Raimi and star Maguire were intentionally trying to sabotage the franchise, brilliantly screwing the studio heads begging for more sequels and, consequentially, the audience as well.
  
  The movie starts out promisingly enough, as an excellent character drama in the spirit of the first two movies. Like the first two, the movie puts the emphasis squarely on the character of Peter Parker and his relationship with those around him, specifically beautiful redhead Mary Jane and "New Goblin" James Franco, as well as Eddie Brach Gwen Stacey, Aunt May, Sandman, J. Jonah Jameson, Captain Stacey, and too many others for the director to keep track of, even if he wanted to, which Raimi certainly doesn't seem to. Then there's the sloppy handling of the introduction of the symbiote that will eventually create Venom. And there's also the annoying continuity error of Eddie Brach, already mentioned as being a photographer for the Daily Bugle in the second movie, coming to the Bugle for the first time in search of a job.
  
  Despite a few excellent action sequences, the character drama soon devolves into an overly long soap opera filled with love triangle upon triangle and other contrived interactions between the characters. The movie then devolves further into a B-list monster movie. Along the way, it mixes in song-and-dance numbers, extremely awkward and sometimes laughable moments, forced humor, and cliché lines from cheesy buddy cops movies. And the whole time the dialogue and situations become more and more cringe-worthy, to the point it seems certain that Raimi and Maguire were trying to make the worst movie possible in order to guarantee there wouldn't be a "Spider-Man 4." The movie climaxes in a series of sickly sweet, over-the-top, sappy "moral of the story" scenes.
  
  Kirsten Dunst at least seems to not be trying to destroy the movie, turning in one of the film's better performances. Nor does Christopher Young, who takes over scoring duties from Danny Elfman, who also wanted desperately out of the franchise. The special effects people also seem to still be trying to turn in their best work, doing incredible jobs of bringing Sandman and Venom to life, even though the movie's major showdown involving the two villains seems like something out of a cheap Godzilla or King Kong movie. Bryce Dallas Howard is kinda cute as Gwen Stacey but seems somehow unnatural. Meanwhile, Topher Grace as Eddie Brach/Venom seems to be playing a more contemporary version of his character from "That 70's Show" while Tobey Maguire, who did an amazing job portraying Peter Parker in the first two movies, mugs so much that he, once again, seems intent on sabotaging the franchise.
  
  The only other people involved with the film who did a decent job were the advertisers. By placing elements of all the best scenes into every trailer, they raised my expectations for "Spider-Man 3." I haven't been this disappointed by a movie in a long time.
  
  
  
  
  
• "Spider-Man 3": flawed but generally absorbing comic book movie
  By A2NJO6YE954DBH on 2007-05-05
  When the review of "Spider-Man 3" in our local paper came out and trashed the movie I was braced for the worse, although since there were four midnight showings on opening day it seems obvious this movie is going to make a lot of money (at least this first weekend). But I really did think it would be nigh impossible for this 2007 film to be better than its 2004 predecessor, which is my favorite comic book movie to date (a verdict I render as someone who teaches comic books in general and Spider-Man in particular in my Introduction to Popular Culture course). "Spider-Man 3" certainly has its flaws and it is not as good as "Spider-Man 2," but those things do not add up to the film being a disappointment.
  
  For Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) and Spider-Man these are the best of times. Spider-Man is beloved by the people of New York City and Aunt May (Rosemary Harris) has given Peter the engagement ring that she received from Uncle Ben (Cliff Robertson) a half-century earlier so that he can propose to Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst). But Harry Osborn (James Franco) knows that Peter is Spider-Man, believes Spidey killed his father Norman (Willem Dafoe), and has found the secret Green Goblin hideout. So right off the bat he comes gunning for Spider-Man. This seems like they are trying to wrap up a loose plot thread from "Spider-Man 2," but this is but one of the several major pieces this movie puts in place for the endgame. Meanwhile, Flint Marko (Thomas Hayden Church) has broken out of jail and become the victim of one of those classic comic book situations where science turns a man into a monster, in this case the Sandman. When Peter finds out it was Marko who actually shot Uncle Ben he takes his first step off the deep end. Peter also has problems in that ambitious Eddie Brock, Jr. (Topher Grace) wants Peter's job as a photographer at "The Daily Bugle," where J. Jonah Jameson (J.K. Simmons). Then there is Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard), a classmate of Peter who gets rescued by Spider-Man and has a big old crush on the web-head, and the sticky black thing from another planet that has attached itself to our hero. No wonder the movie runs 140 minutes.
  
  Director Sam Raimi pours on the special effects in the computer generated fight sequences. What made Doctor Octopus a great villain for a Spider-Man movie was how the two could fight on both the horizontal and vertical axises. Obviously that continues with Venom and to a lesser extent with Sandman, but what those two villains have in common is the fluidity of their "costume" and "body" respectively. They have fun making Spider-Man's costume all torn and tattered, but that is nothing compared to what they are able to do with Sandman's face and body in these fight sequences. When Spidey fights the New Goblin (and there is a reason Harry is not running around as the second Green Goblin), it looks more like a high-speed video game with everything happening faster than the eye can see (compare that with the great fight between Peter and Harry when they are not wearing their costumes).
  
  For me the problematic character is Gwen Stacy, because in the original "Spider-Man" comic books Gwen was Peter's girlfriend long before Mary Jane became his wife. Given the relatively small number of Spider-Man movies that you can make, it made sense to skip Gwen and have Mary Jane there from the beginning, even if it meant turning her into the girl next door instead of the sexy redhead in the go-go boots. But we now know that Peter ends up with MJ, just like we know Clark Kent ends up with Lois Lane and Bruce Wayne is never going to get married. So Gwen's mere presence is problematic because she cannot be the woman he loves who dies because he is Spider-Man. In the "Ultimate Spider-Man" comic book MJ is there from the beginning too, knowing Spider-Man's secret identity, and the integration of Gwen's character into that revision of the story was okay, but it did not have the significance or resonance of the original storyline. The movie Gwen is more like the comic book Mary Jane and that whole plot line would have worked better with Betty Brant (Elizabeth Banks) or an entirely new character than resurrecting Gwen Stacy.
  
  Besides the delicious irony that the blond Dunst has died her hair red while the redheaded Howard has gone platinum, I was bothered by how they had Gwen be a model. Mary Jane was the model and that was important because just like Peter it was a mistake to take her at face value. Instead Dunst gets to sing a couple of songs and while the movie agrees she is not good enough to sing on Broadway it seems a strange way to create a crack in her self-confidence, especially given that nobody faked self-confidence better than MJ. But they are fully committed to the idea of Mary Jane as the girl next door even if they have yet to figure out what that means for the character and her relationship with Peter. Howard is not given much to do, although her last moment is her character's best, and the same goes for James Cromwell as Captain Stacy. But Bruce Campbell completely steals his one scene, Mageina Tovah as Ursula steals a couple, and Stan Lee has his best "Spider-Man" cameo to date, but Dylan Baker's Dr. Curt Connors is still no closer to turning into the Lizard.
  
  The main element they have kept from "Spider-Man 2" is the idea that the conflict between Spider-Man and his foes is no longer black and white, but shades of gray. I liked that for once Doctor Octopus was not a ranting lunatic with mechanical arms but a good man turned evil by a fateful accident (the flip of what happened to Peter Parker) who refuses to die a monster. It was that moment more than Mary Jane discovering that Peter was Spider-Man that really gave "SM2" its weight. This time around there are important shadings for Flint Marko and Harry Osborn, just as there are for Peter Parker as his black Spider-Man costume gets the better of him (but Eddie Brock, Jr. is bad to the bone from start to finish).
  
  In the end I round down on "Spider-Man 3" because I think they are overdoing it with Spider-Man's mask coming off or being half torn (even though I understand the impulse to have the face of the actor you are paying millions to actually appear on screen), the comic relief from spectators during the big battle at the end gets in the way of the developing tragedy, and the fade out scene was by far the weakest of the series to date. I am also not happy with the way Peter's character is regressing, because even before the symbiotic flips him to the dark side he is embracing his inner nerd way too much. Maguire is hysterical when he has Peter strut himself down the street, but it rings wrong for the character. Also, even with the swelled head he is getting from the public adoration as Spider-Man, I do not want to believe that having the costume on when he receives the key to the city was enough to let Peter betray MJ the way he does there. The scene later on at the Jazz club is the insult; it was the other that was the real injury part of the equation. Still, I bet I make it back to the theater to see this one again.
  
  
• Most disappointing movie in a summer full of them
  By A2G8IR6ENZSQHF on 2007-10-29
  By "most disappointing movie of the summer," let me clarify that "Spider-Man III" was not the worst movie of the summer by any means, but in terms of the quality we were expecting compared to the quality we received, it definitely is at the bottom of the list.
  
  Well, I saw it, partly because my ex-girlfriend had some free tickets and partly because I had to pass by the theater anyways because it was on the way to the library. And I can say that "Spider-Man III" instantly made the list of one of the year's most disappointing films. The film is so mediocre that it will immediately make you want to watch "Spider-Man I and II: They Were Better" over again, just to regain your pleasant memories of the franchise.
  
  Well, I guess there's some fun to be had with "Spider-Man III," but it's a pale shadow of what's come before. What's wrong with the film? The first problem is that it tries to cram way too much into its 140-minute running time. Not only is Spider-Man fighting two villains to begin with, he's also having to deal with an evil alien substance (which came from God knows where) that briefly turns him evil. Then, he gets this substance off only for it to possess the character of a rival photographer. So Spider-Man is fighting three villains, in addition to having to deal with a surprisingly whiny Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst, looking as weepy and helpless as ever). With all these subplots going on, none of them ever quite gains momentum, and some simply stop in mid-sentence.
  
  The plotting alone would have sunk the film to a good degree, but there is a lot of other awful stuff happening. First, there's the acting. As mentioned earlier, Dunst is little more than a screentime eater. Tobey Maguire is good as the normal Spider-Man/Peter Parker, but is jaw-droppingly godawful as their evil alter ego. He reminded me of Hayden Christiansen in "Attack of the Clones" more than a terrifying menace. Hayden Church and Franco are OK as Sandman and Goblin (respectively), but Topher Grace as Venom gives one of the worst performances in a comic book film this decade. He plays Venom with all the cheesy menace of a Fantastic Four villain, and his appearance immediately took me out of the film.
  
  Then there's tonal problems. Parts of the movie are as campy as anything in "Batman and Robin," (especially the increasingly awful one-liners) while others are similar in tone to a soap opera, making for a bizarre contrast that never fits together. Perhaps most irritatingly, there are serious gaps in logic. Why is Sandman not shocked at all that he's suddenly turned into a Sandman? Since when did Harry Osbourne's butler become a genius? Why can Sandman withstand the pummeling of a speeding train but not two small rockets? Doesn't Harry forgive someone awfully fast that blew half his face off? Doesn't Sandman change his mind about Spider-Man awfully quickly? And Mary Jane...
  
  I'm going to stop here, to try to not give away too much. This is definitely a major disappointment, on the level of "X3." Its studio is obviously panicky over its financial performance, as it was quick to release polls that showed how much people "liked the film." They're covering up something, as I have yet to meet anyone that has said anything more positive about it other than, "Well, it wasn't as good as the first two, but it still entertained me." So, if you feel you must see it, beware to lower your expectations beforehand. Otherwise, you face crushing disappointment.
  
  
• Mawkish, Overblown, Long, Loud ... where to start?
  By A2SH38M1GOZXK on 2007-05-12
  I used to be a Sam Raimi fan from his "Darkman" days and thought he was an inspired choice to helm the Spider-Man series. And Spider 1 and 2 were indeed pretty good. When I saw George Lucas call Spider 3 "a silly film", I laughed and said "Who is George Lucas to call a film silly?" Well, guess what? He was right. This is the most overblown, mindnumbing two hours I've spent in a movie theater since "Tank Girl". When you get a great actor like Thomas Haden Church playing a villain, why spoil it by cluttering it up with two other lightweight villains (esp. James Franco, again whining about his Dad), more ridiculous plot twists than you can count on both hands and feet, and the obligatory MJ caught-in-a-web climactic scene? And the tears everyone sheds at the drop of a pin! Halfway through the film, I'm saying to myself, "If the Sandman cries, I'm walking out." Well guess what? He does. And then he blows away in the wind, much as I wish this mindless piffle would have done. Please, keep Sam Raimi away from The Hobbit, at all costs.
  
  
• IT DAZZLES. NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS.
  By A1L8HRCM60W0W7 on 2007-05-12
  There will always be naysayers to a franchise such as Spiderman's. It's a mega blockbuster and come time for a sequel, expectations run amok. But I am happy to report that the third outing of this arachnid adventure is just what you would want it to be: very decent popcorn, amid some gulpy, wide-eyed sips of Coke.
  
  Nothing more, nothing less. Don't read too much if you haven't seen the film, it is best enjoyed with minimum hopes. The visual FX are a labor of love and grandeur, despite the running lament of CGI geeks. I had little idea prior to the movie that one of the villains would meet his biological alchemy. Very well composed (and decomposed).
  
  In trying to better what he has accomplished before, the director may have gone over-board by tripling the number of characters and by going for a much too bombastic face-off in the climax, which only amount to the exact opposite: a diminishing effect. But that is offset by the rewards of continuity from previous 'episodes'. There's a heady dollop of good-natured humor, friendship, betrayal, jealousy, love, morality, even some funky moves on the dance floor! Which is fun as it goes a bit beyond senseless derring-do.
  
  In the end, Spidey III is a refreshing departure from cardboard caricatures of good and evil. Bad guys are not always dripping in venom (they have a reason to do what they do, sometimes even rooted in affection), nor the good guys in saccharine. Tobey Maguire is effortless as the gentle, goofy Peter Parker, but we see an extra sliver of his acting range as he stretches his character--and his Spandex--when he is overcome by a dark, sinister thingie. Gives a whole new meaning to the expression "getting one's tights in knots".
  
  A word for Topher Grace. I am thoroughly impressed by how far he has come from That Seventies Show, to capers such as 'P.S.' and In Good Company, to a sharp, screen-dominating cameo in a Level A blockbuster. And he is equal to the task. His gamble with being the baddest of the bad guys, whose vindictive gene gets the better of him at last, is administered with such flair that one is guilty of hoping he would come around in the end. Does he? I'll leave that for you to find out. While he is at it, he sure is punchy.
  
  This is no classy noir but it is spectacular. And while it is studded with perhaps more characters than it may have time to fully develop, it does do its job, and does so with flying colors. Literally.
  
  
• This could be a REALLY polarizing film ...
  By A2LW5AL0KQ9P1M on 2007-05-05
  Comic-book fans will have little trouble following the unusually large cast of characters (and their entanglements); nonetheless, fans of the films alone may find themselves a little overwhelmed: Mary Jane Watson v. Gwen Stacy, Peter Parker v. Eddie Brock, Spidey v. Venom, Spidey v. Sandman, Spidey v. New Goblin. The uninitiated may need to bring a notepad! Likewise, comic-book fans will not mind the "uncomfortable" tension (in fact, many will enjoy it), but fans of the films alone might find it nearly unbearable. Now, Raimi tries to inject humor to deflate the film's tension, but it frequently leaves the viewer (even fans of the comic-book) more perplexed than amused. For example: it is really bizarre to see Venom's "emo" affect on Spidey ... his black eyeliner, black sweeping hair, and black dress shirts ... like he just fell out of a "Panic! at the Disco" video. Certainly, comic-book enthusiasts are familiar with this this "dark side" trope (like red kryptonite's effect on Superman), I personally wish it was done with a little more finesse (something that might stand the "test of time").
  
  Now for some points on which we all may agree (maybe!) Christopher Young's compositions undermine Raimi's intent. Dramatic battles are completely undercut by his decidedly undramatic score. On a positive note: the acting has remained fairly faithful to the previous two films. Maguire does the best he can with the whiplash script, Franco succeeds in his complex role, and Dunst does a perfectly adequate job. Of course, J.K. Simmons and Ted Raimi rock ... and Bruce Campbell shines (what else would we expect?!) And, needless to say, it is always great to see Stan Lee!!
  
  Some will find that the conclusion is a little too "clean" (I, for one, agree with that assertion). Nonetheless, it is crucial to note that comic-book fans expect this ending ... it is faithful to its conventions.
  
  Like many of the reviewers here, I was relieved when the credits appeared. It felt about an hour too long, relied too heavily on awkward battle-scenes, failed to develop characters, and "took the easy way out." And yes, IMDB has Spiderman IV slated for 2009 ... so let's hope Raimi returns to simpler, more intimate plots (if he elects to sign-on for the project!!)
  
  If you're are a fan of the comic-book (or even just the films), see it!! Then return here and weigh-in on the debate!!
  
  
• [3.5]--Not everything magically turns Out for the best in the end
  By A3C6CZC2JP67VK on 2007-05-10
  Firstly I have to say this movie was enjoyable to an certain extent but the rest of it ended up being a disappointment. The plot was so underdeveloped that it turn out to be ridiculous, Tobey Maguire's character has so many mood swings that I couldn't help but wish I saved my gas and ticket money. The villains were mediocre; the ones which should have had more time on screen didn't live up to their potential. We should have been warned when Raimi said in an interview that he was never a fan of Venom. Spiderman represents good, Venom is evil. It's a classic match up, yet Raimi decided to add 30 minutes of Peter Parker becoming emo, thrusting his hips, and a dance sequence. Why have an epic battle between good and evil when you shoot yourself in the foot and focus on hormones? I bet if I would have tried to come up with a way to ruin this movie, I wouldn't have come close to what Raimi accomplished.
  
  And two and a half hours?! They could've made probably 2 decent movies out of those 3 villains and made each one a normal length. Why they decided to fill in as many characters as possible and give them all a whopping 10 minutes of background is beyond me. These are comic book characters, they're hard to make believable in the first place. You really need to give a character like that some depth for an audience to not want to ridicule them. Sandman and the new goblin both admirable foes and both shown well, however venom could have been so much more and came across far too weak as far as I am concerned and seemed to be slipped on the back of an average film to try and boost ratings. I am not one for cliffhangers in large franchises, I mean the only reason I didn't see the 3rd matrix film was because the cliffhanger was pointless and the second film killed off any point of a third, however a full venom film would have made sense due to its sheer fantastic reasoning and design, even introducing the character carnage would have been fantastic, but he seems rushed in this film, and that not the way to win over die hard fans and new fans the like!
  
  This movie will continue to be seen by lots viewers so there's no point on recommending this. It does has some great action sequences and the Bruce Campbell cameo was fantastic, however do not watch this thinking you are going to get the same quality and attention to detail as the first two films, watch it like X-Men 3, as this is just what it is, a good trilogy spoilt by the lack of development and the need to force as many characters in at once.
  
  
  
• The biggest disappointment since Pirates of the Caribbean 2.
  By A3F9VH8916IA40 on 2007-05-11
  I waited a long time for this movie to come out. I watched the trailers with anticipation and slowly awaited its release into theaters. I heard great stuff about this film. "The best spider man" or "best movie of the year". So yeah, I had some pretty high hopes for this movie. Would Harry try to get back at Parker? Would Parker marry Mary Jane? Would Jamison finally get off spider man's back?
  
  Then I saw the movie. Well actually, I almost didn't, because I almost fell asleep half way through. The whole movie was boring from the opening to the cry baby ending. Nothing here was fun; even the bad guys were stupid. How can you have venom in your movie and have it suck? That takes skill, or lack of skill.
  
  this movie suffers from Pirates of the Caribbean 2 syndrome, which is basically "bigger is better, so lets jam as much stuff into a movie as we possibly can." yeah, pirates was a complete flop because they tried to jam too much into the movie, and this one is the same. There are too many sub plots and no main plot. i mean come on, first we have sandman trying to get money to save his daughter (subplot 1) then spider man basking in his new fame and glory (subplot 2) then Harry trying to kill spidy and then being put in a coma and losing his memory, so now he doesn't even remember his fathers death (subplot 3). then Mary Jain losses her job and starts hating parker for being insensitive (subplot 4) and then spidy gets attacked by dark matter turning him into a bad guy (subplot 5) then parkers job is threatened by a new photographer (subplot 6) then Harry wakes up from his comma and starts going after peters heart, sound familiar? (Subplot 7). Not to mention the revelation that sandman was uncle bens real killer (subplot 8). Good god, that a lot of stuff. there's enough here to make two or three movies, but instead of doing that they decide to jam it all into one three hour movie (that's way too long by the way. the LOTR could pull that off, but not SM). What is missing though in this movie is a central plot. Unlike the first two movies there is no central plot that the rest revolve around. In the first it was Parker tying to learn how to use his powers properly and fight off Green Goblin, in the second it was Parker trying to juggle being a college student, spider man, his love life, his job, and his friends all at the same time and failing badly. Here it's just a jumble of subplots thrown in together with no logical thinking behind it. What is the main plot? Please, fans of the movie tell me. Was it spidy turning bad? Was it Sandman killing his uncle? What was it? Everything in this movie is just sort of randomly thrown together. After the first hour I got bored and almost fell asleep but couldn't because the lady sitting to me was eating her popcorn too loudly. too bad, I could have caught up on my sleep, but no, I had to watch this movie till the bitter end.
  
  And don't even get me started on the ending. First of all didn't the scene where Mary Jane is stuck in the wed and the cad is slowly making its way down to her look kind of similar to a scene in Jurassic Park? Yeah, I think it did. Second, when did spidy become so much of a wimp? I mean really, I know he was outnumbered, but he is a veteran super hero, while sandy and venom were newbie's. Couldn't he have at least put up a halfway decent fight? I don't want to ruin the ending for you but pretty much think of the most cliché, corny, idiotic thing that could possibly happen and that is the ending. I'll give you a clue, it involves Harry.
  And after the battle when everyone was crying and boohooing I was just rolling my eyes. Everyone cries at the end, even sandman. How can he cry? He's made of sand. Now don't get me wrong, I like sad movies (read some of my lists and you can see that for yourself) but the "sad" ending in this movie was so over the top, so corny, so cliché, that I almost threw my popcorn at the screen in frustration.
  
  Another thing that annoyed the heck out of me was that the characters would constantly say and do the absolute worst things they could possible can at the absolute worst times. Mary Jane is going through a rough time, so Parker kisses another girl in public and then doesn't understand why she's upset. Please...
  
  Overall this movie sucked. Nothing good here, not even the fight scenes. You should still go see it just because, but don't expect anything like the first two movies. This one was bad, plain and simple. if you read thsi review, whether you agree with me or not, please leave a comment.
  
  
  
• Danielle Steele write this???
  By A203IGEMGBSHR3 on 2007-11-20
  This movie was absolutely terrible. Every character was a whiny self absorbed crybaby.
  Venom practically non existent. Eddie Brock completely miscast. Venom looked like a scrawny wimp.
  Silly "bad Petey" scenes. Sandman the killer of Uncle Ben - LAME.
  Messing with Spiderman's origin for no reason.
  Sandman misunderstood instead of the cruel villian he is in the comics.
  Goblin II, cheap costume, both Goblin and Spidey kept taking off their masks. Lame
  Symbiote suite, simply the normal suite "colored" black, yeah, real innovation there.
  This movie was simply a ploy to sell badly mad toys - WHICH AREN'T SELLING!!!
  Because this movie totally sucked.
  Transfomers had the balls and spine that this movie seriously lacked.
  They need to go back to the drawing board. New writers and actors. Tobey Macguire is obviously sick of doing it and it showed.
  Total suckfest.
  
  
  
• God Bless Sam Raimi, Marvel and Sony for Getting It Right...
  By A1OH0I99ZJSFYC on 2007-05-05
  While I may not have the credibility of some of the other reviewers listed (this is the 1st review I've ever done for ANYTHING) I do know what I like (The Spidey Series, X-men Series, and Blade 1 and 2) and dislike (Daredevil, Ghost Rider and Friggin Cat Woman, OH. MY. GOD.).
  
  With the amount of character content that was introduced in this latest installment, I think Sam Raimi did an outstanding job. He gave the fans exactly what they had been looking and asking for. Of course, any one of the villains this time out could have had their own Spidey film (and perhaps should have) but again, the fans had spoken and to me, it was handled marvelously.
  
  The character and story progression was handled very well. The action was just what you've come to expect from Raimi (and he didn't disappoint!)and the pacing was just enough that I didn't find myself restless at anytime due to the length of the film. I think that Raimi presented us with one of the truest presentations of comic-to-film adaptations possible, and no one can take that away from him (THE most true to date - TO ME - was SIN CITY, Rodriguez just dumped the film straight from the comic to the screen with that one). I loved the Goblin upgrade. I loved the Sandman CGI and battle sequences with our hero. I loved Venom (although, admittedly, wished that there could have been more time with him) and the over-all satisfaction and relief I felt after 1st hearing that there was even going to BE an S3 (you kind of get a little worried about sequel disappointment - "awww maaann, they should have stopped at 2" Blade 3 anyone?).
  
  Of course it was far from a flawless film but the things that I would pick on that I didn't like would probably be glossed over by someone else (I LIKED the little dance number Peter had and the Travolta, 'Saturday Night Fever' shout out Raimi added)so I won't bore you with what I felt were shortcomings and let you make your own decisions.
  
  What it boils down to is Yeah, I'd recommend this film to my pickiest friends with a cheese eating grin on my face and two thumbs way the heck up. I could get into some of the other unfolding story and character points but honestly feel that you'd like to see what they are for yourself (and hope you won't think me a sucky reviewer after seeing it). Go. There's nothing stopping you...
  
  
• What a Tangled Web Raimi Weaves...
  By A13E0ARAXI6KJW on 2007-05-28
  The epic hubris displayed by director Sam Raimi in this latest (and one would hope final) installment of his phenomenally successful Spider-Man series is what frustrates me the most about this overlong, CGI-saturated 2007 movie. It feels like he was given free reign to do whatever he wanted without the intrusion of common sense. The result is a megalomaniacal failure leavened by scattered moments of levity. Written by Raimi, along with his brother Ivan and veteran screenwriter Alvin Sargent, the story begins promisingly with Peter Parker, a.k.a. Spider-Man, regaling in his celebrity status and mustering up enough courage up to propose to longtime love Mary-Jane Watson, who is incredibly making her Broadway musical debut.
  
  The film wastes little time in establishing that Peter's ego has run amok - obviously an ironic parallel to Raimi's situation - and that he will be forced to face a crisis of conscience amid the shenanigans of not one but three villains. Spelling out the motivations of each of these characters takes time, as does the resuscitation of the love triangle between Peter, Mary-Jane and Harry Osborn and Peter's guilt over how he responded to his Uncle Ben's murder. Consequently, the movie feels overstuffed by the multiple storylines that only coalesce through pat plot conventions executed toward the end in order for the movie to have an acceptable running time. Moreover, the novelty of the special effects has tangibly worn out since the initial outing, and there is a surprising technical laziness found in some of the action sequences, especially with the overuse of nighttime shots to camouflage some of the battles.
  
  A key problem also lies in the divergent yet predictable ways the villains have been developed. The resuscitated Green Goblin represents the result of revenge, while Flint Marko is a petty criminal caught in a radiation field that turns him into Sandman, a burgeoning creature made of sand (probably the film's best CGI sequence). The most skimpily developed villain is Venom, a gloopy, fast-moving black parasite that takes hold of Peter first before it takes control of professional rival Eddie Brock. If this was not enough, the story also introduces another key female character, model Gwen Stacy who happens to be the daughter of the police chief and Mary-Jane's competition for Peter's affections. All these detours serve to bring Peter to his original sensibilities about being Spider-Man and of course, to the big climactic battle. This is perhaps the most disappointing portion of the movie as at least two far-fetched plot points undermine the dramatic tension and seem to emphasize the silliness of the entire venture.
  
  In keeping with its comic book origins, Raimi infuses the movie with a sense of humor, but the resulting variability in tone threatens to submerge the movie into camp. The principal actors - Tobey Maguire as Peter, Kirsten Dunst as Mary-Jane and James Franco as Harry - are back but give us little additional depth or texture to their characters. Broadway luminary Rosemary Harris is also back lending sage advice as Aunt May, as are J.K. Simmons as blowhard editor J. Jonah Jameson, Elizabeth Banks as saucy Miss Brant and Dylan Baker as the all-knowing Dr. Connors. Thomas Haden Church plays Marko stoically, while Topher Grace is simply irritating as the obnoxious Brock. Bryce Dallas Howard lends the right vacuity to air-headed Gwen, while Theresa Russell is wasted in a cameo as Marko's defeated wife. This is one dismal blockbuster worth skipping.
  
  
• CAN EVERY BODY SEE THAT IT'S ME?
  By APQ8N1UKS1RDC on 2007-06-05
  This movie is SAD! I mean first off Tobey gets a extension on his
  contract and more $$$ and he looks fat as hell! Did you notice
  that the camera shows him from the breast up when he does not
  have his shirt on! Tobey looking a lil chunkie, not taking the role
  serious enough, thank god for CGI though Spider Man looks very fit.
  Now lets get with the villans. With the exception of Sandman the
  badguys are suppose to wear mask's am I right? I think so. So than
  why is it that we get the Goblin wearing his god awful paintball mask
  for Oh 2min and Venom for 30 sec. It seems to me Sam Raimi got hell
  from the actors of BUT THE PUBLIC WONT GET TO SEE MY FAAACCEE.I mean
  really people while watching it you can see the actors thinking Can
  they see me? My public must be able to see my FACE!!! Even spiderman
  has a long battle without his mask??? And I will not start on Mary
  jane watson(Sorry Kresten I feel you are a good actress just so miscast
  as MARY JANE you look nothing like her. But you seem to have stoled the
  movie. I mean could she have had anymore screen time??? The title
  should be called SPIDER-MAN 3 The Mary Jane Story! Any way if you
  love this movie than you love Police Academy 11 for this is Dribble
  and I gave it 2 stars for I love Sam the man Raimi and of course SPIDEY
  but this could have been better MUCH BETTER! I wish Sam could have made
  Spider-Man in 1991 with C. Thomas Howell from the Hitcher and The
  Outsiders. NOW THATS PETER PARKER! Can everybody see it's me? Can
  everybody see my FAAACCCEEE?????????? Hi I'm looking for a Tobey
  Maguire I have his footlong sub woof sandwich with triple cheese.
  Looking fat there Tobey, not taking the role serious enough.
  You are so lucky C. Thomas Howell is too old for the role.
  
  
• Batman, Aquaman, and Superman review Spidey3
  By A242H31I2UZ2QX on 2007-09-16
  Watch Video Here: http://www.amazon.com/review/R112H4CU4FASW5 This is a SKETCH COMEDY MOVIE REVIEW. I improv comedy while giving an honest review of the film. Also, this is a review of the film NOT the DVD (so I don't cover the extras and so forth). Please enjoy!
  Please check my other reviews!
  
  
• And they thought Topher Grace would be a great Venom... why, exactly?
  By A3HP9JNRHOA5CW on 2007-12-28
  Plot in a nutshell: picking up where #2 left off - or maybe a year or so after #2 - it almost looks like Peter Parker's life has turned around for the better. He's excelling in his studies despite being hit with spitballs by lesser intellects (spitballs? come on Sam, even first graders don't do that anymore!), he has the love of his life, Mary-Jane Watson by his side, MJ just got the lead role in a Broadway musical, he's thinking of popping the question to her, and New York is loving his alter ego, Spider-Man. After the first showing of MJ's play, they enjoy a moment in a big web, staring at the moon, being romantic and affectionate towards each other, so for our hero, life is finally good.
  
  But then the real world brings Pete and MJ's fantasy world crashing down around them. Old friend Harry Osborne is still out to avenge his father, Norman's death, as Norman died as Green Goblin against Spidey - derailed only by a brief memory loss - MJ gets fired from her play due to bad critical response over her singing ability or lack thereof, Peter is so high on the love he's getting from the NY populace that he's not being quite as sensitive to her as he should while she's not giving him the grounding he needs, and Gwen Stacy, a cute classmate of Peter's, seems to have her eye on him. To make things worse, Peter learns that a villain named Flint Marko, now the mutated Sandman, was the real killer of Uncle Ben ala Joker killing Batman's parents in the 1989 Batman film - though Sandman reveals it was an accident - and Peter's spot at the Daily Bugle is now being threatened by a smarmy rival photographer named Eddie Brock Jr. Then Pete's Spider-Man suit gets slimed with black goo that turns out to be an alien symbiont, that augments his powers as well as his aggression. When Peter finally realizes what the black symbiont is doing to him and what it will cost him, he rids himself of it in a church, using the noise of the ringing bell to knock it off - only to have it fall on Brock, who came to the church to pray for Peter's death by God's hand after Peter got him fired for submitting photo-shopped pictures of Spider-Man doing evil. This results in the creation of Venom, who allies himself with Sandman to kill Spider-Man. Who will survive? While it stands head and shoulders above last year's barely broke even super-turkey "Superman Returns", a super-heroic dud if there ever was one, Spider-Man 3 suffers from the same problems that plagued last year's runaway swashbuckler hit sequel "Pirates of the Caribbean 2: Dead Man's Chest" in that it over-stuffs itself and loses some of the idiosyncrasies that made the first go around so appealing, and also works against its themes of hubris and forgiveness. The actors do their best, but the material isn't up to par. Maguire appears to be having fun during his "dark" montage (the walk down the streets while pointing and pelvic thrusting at women who look at him with disgust obviously meant as a dark flip-side to the lighthearted 'Raindrops' montage of #2), but his fling with his dark side really should have been handled more seriously. Dunst, not the greatest actress by any means, gives her all but the film isn't always complimentary towards her. Franco perhaps fairs better as Harry, the friend haunted by old demons and a father's specter that he cannot shake.
  
  Sporting what must be the worst bleach job in cinema history, natural red head Bryce Dalla Howard, almost unrecognizable with ice cream blonde hair, makes the most of the underwritten Gwen Stacy, here given a connection to Eddie Brock that never existed in either the mainstream or Ultimate Marvel universes. But Gwen, the ill-fated lover who was brutally murdered by the Green Goblin back in the 1970s, is little more than a MacGuffin, a plot device to annoy Peter and MJ.
  
  Villains... oh there are too many. Thomas Haden Church makes the most of his Sandman character, a complex but fairly low ranking villain who gets the spotlight mostly because director Sam Raimi seems to like him, but he only appears sporadically, and the thing with him as Uncle Ben's accidental killer not only feels forced but undermines the guilt factor that drives Spider-Man.
  
  Rail thin Topher Grace is hopelessly miscast as Brock/Venom, playing him as basically a mean, jerky version of his 70s Show character, and he's clearly in over his head because he has neither the physicality or intense range to pull it off. Grace no doubt hoped Venom would do for him what Batman did for Michael Keaton, but it just doesn't work. This is what happens when directors are forced to use characters they clearly don't like and then create watered down hybrids of them from their mainstream/Ultimate universe counterparts.
  
  Well, the action sequences are still superb, and the film does have an obviously deep love for its title character. It's biggest crime is that it over-reaches its grasp, as seems to be the fate of so many comic book film franchises. So it's entirely great, but it's not entirely bad either.
  
  
• The critics can go fly a kite - this was a blast
  By A146D2LYLICNLS on 2007-05-05
  I went to see "Spider-Man 3" tonight after reading several not-so-great reviews earlier today from local newspapers. So I had some doubts going into the theater. Well I'm sure glad I went anyway, because this movie was a BLAST. The critics need to lighten up. No, it wasn't a perfect film, and if one insists on being a hardass they can nit-pick it and find some valid faults. But overall, it was one of the most exciting and *fun* movies I've seen in quite some time.
  
  One of the complaints seems to be that too many villains are in it. I thought this may be the case before seeing it, but I thought the film handled their screen time quite well, even if Venom didn't get to do much (although he does have a very good showdown with Spider-Man during the final confrontation scene). But I gotta say that the Sandman grabbed my attention the most, especially his fight scenes with Spider-Man and others. To me, seeing the Sandman in the final confrontation was worth the price of admission. The special effects for his character were simply outstanding - they were fairly standard CGI for the others.
  
  As with the other 2 movies, the scenes of humor were well timed and executed, without compromising the tone of the film. I do wish that Kirsten Dunst hadn't gotten suspended high in the air yet again, because we all know that Spider-Man is going to save her from falling, yet again. But I suppose that's a minor irritation I can live with. Performance-wise, I liked everyone in their roles. We already knew what to expect from Maguire and Dunst, so there were no surprises there. Thomas Haden Church put in a good show as the Sandman. And although I wish they had let Bryce Dallas Howard be her lovely redheaded self, she still looked mighty fine, and I'm glad she got a considerable amount of screen time.
  
  IMO the first "Spider-Man" film was decent but not much more than that. And I'd rate the second film along with this third installment as superb, just in different ways. Part 2 was great due to the solid story and overall script. While part 3 lacks some of that, it more than makes up for it with better and bolder action and pure entertainment level. I was originally going to give this 4 stars but decided to go all the way to 5 mainly because I had such a great time with it. Think of this film as the nitro-charged extension of part 2 and I'll bet you'll find yourself more than pumped by the time the end credits roll.
  
  
• Even comicbook action must be credible!
  By A2R4F2SNWGLOSX on 2007-05-11
  If you want to just enjoy wild comicbook-like action, you may love this movie. Personally, if the action scenes are too unbelievable, the producers have lost me!
  
  Also, the pace of this movie goes from veeeeeeery slow, to WHAM! Son-of-Goblin wisks Peter off his unsuspecting feet and we launch into miles of thrashing each other into brick walls, up and down hundreds of feet in a split-second. Where they lost me (early) was why were they each fine after certain building-bashing-blows, but then "hurt" by less severe thrashings?
  
  Ok, I liked that they introduced and blended a subplot of an escaped murderer (who we are supposed to feel sorry for because he's only trying to steal money to help his ill daughter). But how tha-duh is he running across a huge grassy field in frickin' downtown NYC, and stumbles into some new technology testing pit, in which he is turned into sand? Um... do we get a follow-up on why this top-secret experiment location is in downtown NYC? Come on!
  
  And there is ZERO follow-up at how there happened to be a living thing from outer space landing on Earth. No one ever even questions the issues raised by that. Come on!!
  
  And I guess NYC is just a really small place, because Peter's recently-fired rival photographer is wandering the streets and just happens to hear Peter grunting hundreds of feet up in a downtown NYC bell tower. What a cheesy way to get the bad black junk onto our next angry man. The script writers may have recently seen the ending of The Exorcist and thought it was a cool way to effect this transition. Better to get original, and THINK! Come on!!!
  
  The way every street-walkin' NYC babe (of course they are the only kind of women in the city) went gaga over Peter's simple hip movement, was not exactly convincing. Come on!!!!
  
  And I'll end my complaints with the final scene. How is it credible that after hours of falling glass, devastation by the giant sandman, and falling vehicles, we still have a huge crowd of Spider-man cheerers standing right in the middle of it all?????? Did the director recall 9-11-01, when real falling debree made real people really flee with every ounce of energy they had, and as far as they could as fast as they could?
  Come Come on!!!!!
  
  Sorry, Spider fans. This box-office exciter is too stupid for anyone with more than sand for a brain.
  
  
• Another Winner!
  By AUGABW5AS2OXM on 2007-05-20
  Like the two previous Spiderman movies this was an excellent movie. This
  has been a series of outstanding comic book hero movies. The characters
  are just like they appeared in the original comic books. This movie also has some of the most dazzling and outstanding special effects that you will see in a movie.
  Spiderman is riding a wave of popularity. He is beloved by everyone and
  everywhere. His romance with Mary Jane is still simmering. His friend Harry Osborne is still wanting revenge because of his father's death.He
  becomes the New Goblin. A new villain comes in the person of the Sandman.
  He escapes prison and stumbles into a physics testing center. He is changed by one of the experiments being conducted there. He now has the ability to change forms by turning into sand. A meteor crashes near Peter
  Parker and Mary Jane. A parasite escapes from the meteor. It takes Peter Parker over. He turns into a different person. He turns into an ugly person. He even has eyes for another woman. The parasite leaves Parker and takes over Eddie Brock a rival reporter. Brock turns into Venom an evil villain.It falls upon Spiderman to defeat all of these forces of evil. This makes for an action packed movie.
  This is definitely one of the biggest movies to come out this year. If
  you miss it shame on you.
  
  
• A very poor follow up to the excellent Spider-Man 2
  By A36KIHJ30R9OEJ on 2007-09-15
  After the superb movie that was Spider-Man 2, I had high expectations for it's successor. I knew it had big shoes to fill, and I wondered how Sam Raimi would top Spider-Man 2.
  
  Unfortunately, he didn't. He didn't even come close. Spider-Man 3 is without a doubt the worst of the three Spider-Man movies. It lost the heart and soul of it's predecessors. It's a horrible mix of rushed plot lines, under developed characters, and over the top stupid cheesiness [the dance sequences, those horrible reporters, and so much more].
  
  Tobey Maguire does his best with a horrible script. But, his ludicrous dancing, ridiculous bad boy emo look, and constant crying, really water down his performance.
  Kirsten Dunst delivers her worst performance yet. Her MJ is not at all endearing in any way. She pouts, whines, and complains thru the entire movie. Why does Peter love this girl?
  James Franco fares much better, delivering a great performance as the tortured and vengeful Harry Osborn. He is the undisputed star of this movie.
  Thomas Haden Church is wasted. The actor himself doesn't even appear on screen most of the time, as his character is usually a large CGI sand cloud or a giant sand monster. The character has virtually no personality, and because of that I failed to feel any kind of connection to the character. The Sandman connection to Uncle Ben was ridiculously contrived and utterly pointless.
  Topher Grace is another wasted actor. Eddie Brock is reduced to a few brief appearances at random spots throughout the movie. There is no exploration of the character. No substance given to him. No development. His turn into a villain at the movie's climax is rushed, and brief. Venom is the most forgettable villain of the movie's villain trio, and of the whole Spider-Man movie trilogy.
  
  It's not all entirely bad, though. J.K. Simmons delivers another great turn as Jonah Jameson. Bryce Dallas Howard is utterly sweet and charming as the kind Gwen Stacy, Peter's college friend. Lets hope she becomes the new love interest in future sequals.
  
  
• why, oh why?
  By A2Q543HHCAFPK5 on 2007-10-14
  Spiderman had to me at least, till part 3 been the reigning champ of superhero movies, till part 3...
  Then Sam Raimi decides to go the way of Joel Schumaker and pile in 3 villains into the same story line, making this movie unbearable, and to add to the insult, that whole Peter Parker does the ghostbusters walk down NY streets, OMG!
  Finally we see Venom on screen and he's there a total of what? maybe 15 minutes??!! The one villain I know tons of people were expecting to see and this is what we get, such a letdown. I only hope that if there is a part 4, Raimi gets his head back into the game and gives just one well developed villain, like he had in the past.
  
  
• Top 10 all time worst movies
  By A3DVQKF4P90HG2 on 2007-12-02
  This movie was terrible. The computer animation was horrible. Plot was stupid. The whole Emo-spidey was absolutely retarded. The best scene is when Mary Jane gets slapped. It drew applause from me and my friends. I hate this movie.
  
  
• The Dark Side of the Web
  By A18G7GG53G2X8A on 2007-05-04
  What set the "Spider-Man" films apart from many other superhero films was a delicate balance between comic book action and emotion, between high tech special effects and human drama. In this regard, Sam Raimi's "Spider-Man 3" is in no way a departure from the first two films; it remains on perfectly equal ground, presenting a story that carefully combines frenetic fight sequences, grandiose science fiction, and an emotional roller coaster. I don't dare assume that this is the best film in the series, nor can I claim that it's the greatest superhero film ever made. What I can say is that, like its predecessors, "Spider-Man 3" is a fun movie that is sure to entertain those who are willing to experience it.
  
  The first major scene has Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) and Mary Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst) lying on a giant spider web in the middle of a park, staring up at the night sky. The romantic aspect plays itself to the fullest, and rightfully so; the emotional core of the story depends on their love and possible engagement, which will be tested in more ways than one. The first test arrives on a rogue meteorite that crash-lands in the park (where it came from is never explained, but I suppose it doesn't really matter); a viscous, shape shifting black goo emerges from its smoldering cocoon. It then attaches itself to Parker's motorbike and follows him home, where it waits. For what is not yet known, but if there's one thing to be sure about in this kind of film, it's that anything from outer space--especially a dark sludge--most likely means trouble.
  
  The second test is Spider-Man's fame, which is putting a strain on Parker and M.J.'s relationship. It seems to be going to Parker's head lately, and it shows during an award ceremony (Spidey is given the key to the city for his heroic acts). He swings into the crowd and high-fives a number of kids before doing gymnastics on the stage. He then hangs upside down and asks the presenter--Gwen Stacy (Bryce Dallas Howard)--to kiss him like M.J. did in the first movie. It was never meant to be romantic; it was only for the sake of publicity. Nonetheless, M.J. is not at all amused. Parker is unconsciously pushing her away to keep his Spider-Man image strong, which doesn't exactly boost her self-confidence. It doesn't help that her dream of staring in a Broadway musical is shattered; the critics have a field day attacking her singing voice, and she's fired from the production.
  
  The third test is Flint Marko (Thomas Haden Church), an escaped convict. Because of a scientific accident only possible in a comic book adaptation, his molecular structure has been altered into grains of sand. At will, he can change from a solid man into the gritty monster Sandman; he can even meld with other forms of earth and make himself gigantic. But what exactly are his motives? I ask this because he was crafted as a sympathetic character: despite having done bad things to people, his only concern is the well being of his young daughter, who's apparently quite ill (with what is never revealed). What makes the situation worse is that he was responsible for the death of Parker's uncle. This ignites a rage within Parker, and it only gets stronger when the black space slime finally makes contact. Not only does it attach itself to his Spider suit, turning it black, it also intensifies Parker's aggression and fuels his hatred. It also makes him arrogant during normal daily life, an aspect that's more comical than serious.
  
  The fourth test is rival photographer, Eddie Brock, Jr. (Topher Grace), who threatens Parker's position at the "Daily Bugle." Loud-mouthed Editor in Chief J. Jonah Jameson (J.K. Simmons) offers a desk job to anyone who can capture an incriminating photo of Spider-Man; this paves the way for a number of circumstances that eventually turn Brock and Parker into bitter enemies. I distinctly remember a scene in a church, in which Brock prays that God murder Parker. How heavy-handed for a superhero story: it could have been humorous had the atmosphere not been so intense. And it gets even more intense when he comes into contact with a bit of the black space goo; it turns him into the vile super villain known as Venom.
  
  The fifth and final test is Harry Osborn (James Franco), whose rage over the death of his father is deepening. Having since discovered the true identity of Spider-Man, he now vows to destroy Peter Parker, his former best friend. Not only does he fight with Parker as the New Goblin, he also forces M.J. to break up with Parker. At this point in the story, it's becomes obvious that revenge is the main theme. Granted, this isn't an original idea (consider "Batman"). However, hidden beneath the vengeful layers is the possibility of forgiveness, and that alone made this film a lot more enjoyable. By the time we get to the climactic battle at a construction site (reminiscent of Raimi's own "Darkman"), the audience will discover who can let go of the past and who will remain stuck in the depths of hate.
  
  And yes, they'll be treated to a number of impressive battle sequences, all of which rely heavily on computer generated imagery. I purposely avoided elaborating on this; despite being prominently featured, "Spider-Man 3" is about more than its eye candy; it's about balancing its eye candy with its human story. Generally speaking, it worked quite well (I exempt a dance sequence at a jazz club; talk about unnecessary). In fact, the entire "Spider-Man" series worked quite well, and with that, I have only one more thing to say: if you liked the first two, you'll definitely like the third.
  
  
• rampant overkill
  By A19ZXK9HHVRV1X on 2007-05-06
  Clocking in at an interminable two hours and twenty minutes, "Spider-Man 3" is a movie desperately in need of some serious streamlining. There is such a plethora of characters, plotlines, villains and monsters - all vying for attention and getting in each others' way in the process - that the movie feels as if it has been assembled by a committee rather than having arisen from a single artist's organic vision.
  
  The ostensible selling point of "Spider-Man 3" is that the meek and mild-mannered Peter Parker (Tobey Maguire) dons a mysterious black suit that suddenly turns him into a heartless, cranky bad guy. The suit, which is actually a creepy-crawly creature from outer space that changes the personality of whomever it clings to, is only one of four villains Spidey has to contend with here - in as clear a case of malefactor overload as we've encountered in quite some time. No wonder Spider-Man looks so worn out (we seriously thought it might just be the by-product of sequel fatigue). The other foes include his friend, Harry Osborn, aka New Goblin (James Franco), who still believes Parker was responsible for his father`s death ("old" Goblin, if anybody`s keeping track); Flint Marko (Thomas Haden Church), the actual murderer of Parker`s uncle who has been transformed into a giant killer sandman; and a cocky little newspaper photographer, Eddie Brock (Topher Grace), who is determined to snap a photo of Spider-Man doing something bad so as to tarnish the superhero`s hitherto sterling reputation around town (Brock becomes a victim of the dark suit as well).
  
  One would think that with all this occupying the hero, the scenarists (Ivan Raimi, Alvin Sargent and writer/director Sam Raimi) wouldn`t have much time left over for romantic entanglements, but one would be wrong in that assumption, for a great deal of the film is devoted to the relationship between Parker and his girlfriend, Mary Jane (Kirsten Dunst), who has become a tremendously needy, whiney and self-pitying character in this installment. In fact, so tedious is the romance this time around that whatever charisma and charm Maguire and Dunst exuded as a couple in the previous two films has been completely wiped out on this occasion. While I must concede that they are both tremendously likable actors, I think they may have gone once too often to the well with these particular roles. Maguire's impossibly sweet and good-natured demeanor has become particularly annoying at this point (although he isn`t all that convincing when he`s trying to play the bad-boy villain either).
  
  I've never been much of a fan of Spider-Man, either in comic book form or in the movies, but one of the reasons why "Spider-Man 2" worked as a film and the others haven't is because, in that movie, Parker's crippling self-doubts about whether or not he was really cut out to be a superhero gave a depth to the character that was psychologically sound and which made it easy for the audience to identify with him. In "Spider-Man 3," however, Parker essentially has his "evil" thrust upon him from an outside source and, thus, that key psychological dimension is now lacking. Instead, the filmmakers have decided to really turn on the waterworks in this film, with just about everybody breaking down in tears at one point or another, culminating in an ending so syrupy and sappy that both dieters and diabetics should probably leave the theater a good fifteen minutes before the close of the story.
  
  That pretty much leaves the special effects, which run the gamut from decent (they still haven't really figured out how to make Spider-Man's "flying" very convincing on screen) to spectacular (the Sandman is a really cool creature, indeed). The fight scenes are impressively hectic and noisy (which may explain the headache I developed halfway through the film), but it is rather difficult to develop much of a personal rooting interest in the outcome when a group of what are essentially invincible figures are battling it out for supremacy. And talk about villain overkill!
  
  With "Spider-Man 3," the superhero's movie batting-average drops from an impressive .500 to a middling .333. Let's hope he can raise it back up the next time he steps up to the plate.
  
  
• Very Good Sequel but could have been better
  By A2FVPTS77ALKLV on 2007-11-02
  Spiderman 3 puts out alot to absorb a bit too much. Where the first 2 movies attempt to delve into the characters this sequel leaves a lot of character building out especially that of the Sandman and Venom. We never find out what the experiment was that turned him into the sandman or exactly what Venom is. The name Venom is not even stated by any of the characters. There are so many subplots that the time alotted does not give them all time to act out. Instead they are rather rushed and the ending leaves you a bit confused and scratching your head. Again Toby Maguire is brilliant as every day nerd Peter "Spiderman" Parker. You can so relate to Peter as the problems he goes through all of us have at sometime or another. Peter begins to enjoy the fame and popularity that Spiderman is getting. So much that it alienates Mary Jane and his relationship with her becomes strained. Harry Wants revenge thinking Peter killed his father. An escaped convict named Marco feels his criminal activity is justified because he wants bad to make his daughter well again. While on the run he falls into a sand pit during and experiment and becomes the sand man. Venom arrives by way of a meteor and clings and then joins with Peter Unleashing his inner demons and dark side including turning his Spidey suit black (looks cool actually) . Peter has a rival named Brock who is after Peters job. Brock is the Anti Peter. He arrogant, cocky and and selfish. Mary Janes acting/Singing career has hit a snag and for the most part whines about it and Pushes Peter further away but not telling him and thinking he could care less since Spiderman is so poular now (jealous for sure). Also its Discovered Marco actually killed Uncle ben making Peter go nuts in wanting revenge. Lots of plots to put in a movie isnt it? So Peter has to fight Harry, the sandman and himself and then Brock as Venom once Peter frees himself of it. The main them of the Movie trys to be that of Forgiveness. It acheives that to some ends but not well as it could have. I wont give away more on the film but in the end your left a bit confused but the film leaves an opening for the return of both sandman and venom. A good movie but could have been so much better
  
  

• PSP I.Sound Theatre With Wireless Remote
• PSP Powered Audio Case
• PSP Headset
• PSP Game & UMD Case

• Spider-Man / Spider-Man 2 (Widescreen Special Editions)
• Fantastic Four Collection (Fantastic Four/ Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer)
• The Hoax
• The Reaping
• The Hunting Party